Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already establish that this is a read-only, closed-world operation. The description adds meaningful behavioral context beyond annotations: the call is free, certain fields are hidden until the creator is unlocked, and campaignId extends the response with campaign progress.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is front-loaded with what the tool returns, followed by the free/unlock condition and the optional campaignId behavior. Every sentence carries useful information, and the field list is justified because there is no output schema.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Given there is no output schema, the description appropriately enumerates the return fields and explains hidden fields before unlock. With read-only annotations and fully described parameters, an agent has enough context to invoke the tool correctly.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so both parameters are already documented in the input schema. The description reinforces campaignId’s purpose but does not add format, constraints, or failure behavior beyond what the schema provides.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description states a specific verb and resource: returns a creator’s profile. It enumerates the profile fields returned and makes clear it is distinct from discovery tools like search_creators by operating on a known creatorId.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

It clearly indicates the primary use case—fetching a creator profile by id—and explains that campaignId optionally adds campaign-specific context. It also implies the relationship to unlock_creator by noting which fields remain hidden until unlock, but it does not explicitly name alternatives or when not to use this tool.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.